 |
|
The ongoing legal battle surrounding Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's arrest and subsequent imprisonment has raised significant questions about the functioning of the Delhi government. The Supreme Court, in a recent hearing, posed a critical query: can the Chief Minister effectively run the government from jail? This question has become particularly pertinent as another bench of the apex court is set to deliver its verdict on Kejriwal's bail application in the excise policy case. If granted bail, the question would become moot. However, the current legal limbo has left a considerable gap in the governance of Delhi, with numerous crucial decisions requiring the Chief Minister's approval pending.
Constitutional experts, interviewed by The Times of India, have argued that Kejriwal, being an undertrial and not a convicted individual, should be allowed to perform his constitutional duties. They advocate for the Supreme Court to consider 'out of the box' solutions, potentially allowing him to conduct meetings and sign files while in custody. This, however, would require a formal petition from Kejriwal to the court. The potential for such a scenario has emerged due to the growing backlog of decisions requiring the Chief Minister's intervention. The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the delay in processing a file related to the remission of sentences for eligible convicts, a critical issue that demands the Chief Minister's signature. This has prompted the court to explore its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, enabling it to pass necessary orders for achieving complete justice.
While running a government from jail is considered impractical due to the restrictive nature of prison life, experts argue for special provisions given the unique circumstances. Former Lok Sabha Secretary General PDT Achary, emphasizing the importance of upholding constitutional rights, asserts that the Chief Minister should be permitted to fulfill his responsibilities as stipulated in the Constitution. He further contends that the jail manual, which governs the behavior of inmates, should not supersede the constitutional rights of a Chief Minister. Achary suggests an alternative approach, advocating for a guest house to be converted into a temporary jail, enabling Kejriwal to perform his duties from a less restrictive environment.
Other constitutional experts, like S N Sahu, agree that the situation is unprecedented, lacking any constitutional provision mandating resignation or transfer of power upon the imprisonment of a Chief Minister. While the Supreme Court cannot compel resignation, it could consider a petition from Kejriwal seeking permission to discharge his constitutional duties from jail. Senior advocate Vikas Singh proposes that Kejriwal, as an undertrial, should be provided facilities to carry out his duties within the jail, similar to the accommodations previously granted to former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav. Singh emphasizes that Kejriwal should be allowed to meet his officers and sign files, arguing that the trial court should not have denied this facility.
Former Tihar Jail official Sunil Gupta acknowledges the potential for allowing Kejriwal to fulfill certain duties from jail. However, he emphasizes the need for judicial discretion regarding specific permissions. Given that Kejriwal is in judicial custody, the strict application of the jail manual may be less relevant. Gupta highlights the possibility of the court granting specific permission for signing files, particularly those related to the rights of individuals seeking remission, where delays could constitute a violation of their rights. This potential scenario demonstrates the flexibility the court could exercise in facilitating certain official tasks from jail.
The current situation, with Kejriwal's incarceration exceeding five months, has presented a unique challenge to the governance of Delhi. The absence of provisions in the Delhi Prison Rules for official meetings or file handling within the jail has prompted the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to reference the special permission granted to the former Sahara Group chief to operate a temporary office from jail. This precedent strengthens the AAP's argument for allowing Kejriwal to oversee the government's operations from Tihar Jail.
The Supreme Court's upcoming decision on Kejriwal's bail application will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the current situation. If granted bail, the question of his ability to run the government from jail becomes moot. However, if the bail application is denied, the court's response to the issue of allowing Kejriwal to perform his constitutional duties while incarcerated will hold immense weight, setting a crucial precedent for future situations involving elected officials.